A court recently held that a manufacturer who rebuilds a general aviation aircraft part becomes immune from accident-related civil suits 18 years after the original delivery date of the aircraft or the installation date of the part (if the part was not original equipment). This is important because the statute of repose does not get reset by the rebuild.
Under the General Aviation Revitalization Act (GARA), a company that acts in its capacity as a manufacturer benefits from a statute of repose. This means that 18 years after the general aviation aircraft is first delivered, no one can sue the manufacturer for accident-related claims. For original parts on the aircraft, the parts manufacturers become immune from suit 18 years after the aircraft is delivered. For replacement and modification parts, the 18 year statute of repose begins when the part is installed.
In a case decided earlier this year, the United States District Court in Delaware decided that because a rebuild is a uniquely manufacturing activity, it benefits from the manufacturer’s original manufacturing date for purposes of GARA. In that case, a general aviation aircraft engine was produced more than 18 years before an accident (so it appeared to benefit from the statute of repose). The magnetos had been rebuilt by the manufacturer about 11 years before the accident.
The plaintiff’s lawyers claimed that this rebuild was not protected by the statute of repose. They based their argument on a House Report that clarified that Congress did not intend to insulate maintenance activities under GARA.
The court explained that rebuilding can only be performed by the manufacturer (14 C.F.R. § 43.3(j)). Although it is described under the Part 43 maintenance rules, the fact that it can only be performed by a manufacturer makes it a function performed in one’s “capacity as a manufacturer,” which is the operative limiting phrase in GARA.
For more information, please see the Memorandum Opinion, Quinn v. AVCO Corp. (D. Del. March 3, 2022).